When we first thought of the idea...I wanted to keep the number of people on teams down. Mainly so that you can stay close to your team when you start to get too many people they start separating from the team. I started with 7 only because it sounded like a good number. I think if we do add more to each team that it never goes above 10. I know athletic teams go much higher but they are all in the same physical place...I think it is harder to keep a online team together the more people you get.

I also wanted each member of a team to feel important and have an opportunity to use their score in a bout...the more people you get the odds of someone being on a team and never really contributing becomes greater. Just like on those big sports teams...I don't want to have a bunch of "bench warmers"

i think team expansion 'might' be a good idea in the next go round, but that there are too many other variables to consider to try to make that adjustment this late in the process. for example, if you have more members, you might need to adjust the scoring mechanism as well (taking 5 scores instead of 4). you might also need to take into account the minimum size of a 'finalized' team, balancing seedings based on team sizes, etc. it's probably all doable, but i don't think it would be so simple as to do it right now...

I say I don't want them...but if you were able to look back you would see I was the LVP (Least Valuable Player) on my team. If we had more people on the team I would probably never get a score used....but that means the overall score of the team would be higher. I'm fine with one or two more members but not more than that.

I say I don't want them...but if you were able to look back you would see I was the LVP (Least Valuable Player) on my team. If we had more people on the team I would probably never get a score used....but that means the overall score of the team would be higher. I'm fine with one or two more members but not more than that.

My statement was meant to be funny. I guess it wasn't. It's a true statement, but I can laugh at it. ;)

I say I don't want them...but if you were able to look back you would see I was the LVP (Least Valuable Player) on my team. If we had more people on the team I would probably never get a score used....but that means the overall score of the team would be higher. I'm fine with one or two more members but not more than that.

My statement was meant to be funny. I guess it wasn't. It's a true statement, but I can laugh at it. ;)

It's funny...because I'm in the same boat...we can laugh at ourselves.

On rounding out the teams, why not have a box to check in the free agent signups where a free agent could indicate whether they would be willing to serve as a captain.

At the end of the sign up period, the system could randomly create teams out of the existing free agent pool, up to the number needed to meet the next benchmark (72, 96 etc.), appointing as captains those who expressed a willingness to serve. It could also randomly assign free agents to unfinished created teams as well.

To make this work, you'd probably have to end sign ups a day before the new challenges are announced (i.e., sign ups close saturday, all teams finalized sunday, and ready for the first battle starting at midnight)

10 - How do we get a forum thread? And is it private?
Your team will automatically get a forum thread created once the season starts - assuming your team is finalised - and will be hidden from all other DPC users APART FROM the Site Council, who will only read the threads for moderation purposes.

how long are you guys waiting to hear back from people you invite on to your team, Id really like to finalise mine?

Don't wait too long. Give them a few hours, send a PM if desperate, and if no response by another hour or so, try someone else.

It'd help if there was some way of making it known that people sitting in the pool aren't responding to invites, or seem to be idle.

If they are already tracking the last date someone logged into the site maybe show that information next to the free agents? That way you could target those who are currently online or have been to the site most recently.

If they are already tracking the last date someone logged into the site maybe show that information next to the free agents? That way you could target those who are currently online or have been to the site most recently.

On rounding out the teams, why not have a box to check in the free agent signups where a free agent could indicate whether they would be willing to serve as a captain.

At the end of the sign up period, the system could randomly create teams out of the existing free agent pool, up to the number needed to meet the next benchmark (72, 96 etc.), appointing as captains those who expressed a willingness to serve. It could also randomly assign free agents to unfinished created teams as well.

To make this work, you'd probably have to end sign ups a day before the new challenges are announced (i.e., sign ups close saturday, all teams finalized sunday, and ready for the first battle starting at midnight)